Was in the same situation, chose the TLM67...not that I tried many others, I just can't at this time. But we rented it for a demo and it was perfect. Flat and classy. You may find better, but you can surely find alot worse. I suggest you try it before you make a final decision!

Yeah, I've grown tired of guessing and that's why im testing. I have also realized that what one thinks is a bright mic, might be airy to someone else.

I have made my tests in a reated room and with two Gik screenpanels behind me.

Well anyway, to me the U87ai and Manley ref c are totally different. To me the u87 has the same mid forward character as peluso 2247, pearman tm1 etc, on my low (dark) voice it sounds thin and boxy. The manley suited my voice well, but a tad too much of upper highs, but with eg ma5 it was very polished, but for me a bit pricey.

But the bock 195 with fat switch on made my voice come alive, the low boost really made it. To me it also made the acoustic guitar shine also the ugly mids are gone.

Over the weekend i will try them in
Our rehearsel room, a much much bigger room, will report again.

But to me, the u87ai, nothing special, plain boring, there cheaper mics that will give better results. The manley is a different story if you got the cash.

I did that a while ago. Fell in love with the Geffel UM92.1 It's nothing short of stunning into a Neve. At least on my voice. The only thing you won't know is how it sounds when you bring it back into your environment.

I did that a while ago. Fell in love with the Geffel UM92.1 It's nothing short of stunning into a Neve. At least on my voice. The only thing you won't know is how it sounds when you bring it back into your environment.

That's also true, maybe I could go to a local studio and ask them to lend me all their mics hehe :D

Yeah, I've grown tired of guessing and that's why im testing. I have also realized that what one thinks is a bright mic, might be airy to someone else.

I have made my tests in a reated room and with two Gik screenpanels behind me.

Well anyway, to me the U87ai and Manley ref c are totally different. To me the u87 has the same mid forward character as peluso 2247, pearman tm1 etc, on my low (dark) voice it sounds thin and boxy. The manley suited my voice well, but a tad too much of upper highs, but with eg ma5 it was very polished, but for me a bit pricey.

But the bock 195 with fat switch on made my voice come alive, the low boost really made it. To me it also made the acoustic guitar shine also the ugly mids are gone.

Over the weekend i will try them in
Our rehearsel room, a much much bigger room, will report again.

But to me, the u87ai, nothing special, plain boring, there cheaper mics that will give better results. The manley is a different story if you got the cash.

So you like the bock more than the manley reference cardioid on your voice? Did you try the manley on the acoustic?

So you like the bock more than the manley reference cardioid on your voice? Did you try the manley on the acoustic?

Yes I did, the Manley was great for acoustic guitar, even though I think that the Bock made the guitar sound fuller. So in a mix with the guitars in the background I would prefer the Manley but If an sing/song wrighter stuff with just vocals and acoustic guitar I would prefer the Bock.

Actually I tried my api 5500 and Mc77 and it worked extremly well. Low shelf 50 -2db boosted a little top, and I could easy go for 8:1 fastest attack, medium release and compress it 4-6db to hold the guitar in place without sound squashed.

They u87 takes eq well also but again I found myself cutting the mids... again

Yeah, I've grown tired of guessing and that's why im testing. I have also realized that what one thinks is a bright mic, might be airy to someone else.

I have made my tests in a reated room and with two Gik screenpanels behind me.

Well anyway, to me the U87ai and Manley ref c are totally different. To me the u87 has the same mid forward character as peluso 2247, pearman tm1 etc, on my low (dark) voice it sounds thin and boxy. The manley suited my voice well, but a tad too much of upper highs, but with eg ma5 it was very polished, but for me a bit pricey.

But the bock 195 with fat switch on made my voice come alive, the low boost really made it. To me it also made the acoustic guitar shine also the ugly mids are gone.

Over the weekend i will try them in
Our rehearsel room, a much much bigger room, will report again.

But to me, the u87ai, nothing special, plain boring, there cheaper mics that will give better results. The manley is a different story if you got the cash.

Here are my past observations about the u87ai, I see we have a very different voice, but our conclusions about the u87ai were the same, in totally different situations. Don't want to hijack this thread and turn it into a u87ai bashing, but I felt it was interesting to share.

I have tried both, the TLM67 through vintech and the u87ai through SSL Alpha channel.

I have a high pitched, slightly nasal voice, and the u87ai is like a magnifying glass for this. Totally ugly. The tlm67 on the other hand, sounded so nice, neutral, not too polished, and did not feel hyped in any way anywhere in the spectrum, like the u87ai can be on the high mids.

To give it a fair shot, the preamp used with the tlm67 was better, but still, I got a pretty good idea of the character.

I was underwhelmed by the U87ai and the SSL Alpha Channel used together.

The u87ai had this high mid bump that was freakin' ugly on my voice. The SSL, well... First of all, it looks like cheap gear, and it's sound is too clean for my taste. It's all about taste afterall...Maybe the combination was the key here, but while the u87ai might sound better through a different mic pre, it's character will not change. It's a no no for me...

If this mic is one of the most popular mics around, we're probably not talking about the ai version (I have never heard older versions but general consensus seems to be that they're warmer) because I can't see how this mic would fit the bill for an all around mic in a studio. This high mid bump is really nasty! Especially if you have a high pitched voice like me!

I'm seeking some help in knowing the real life differences between these 3 microphones, as I'm looking for a vocal mic in that price range...

To give a certain perspective, I have recorded with a u87ai which I did not like at all, being too hyped in the high mids. It did not suit my high pitched voice at all, which can turn a little nasal when pushed. For sure, it was only an SSL Alpha Channel, but i'm not sure the pre is the faulty guy in the chain (though it didn't help)

Here are my past observations about the u87ai, I see we have a very different voice, but our conclusions about the u87ai were the same, in totally different situations. Don't want to hijack this thread and turn it into a u87ai bashing, but I felt it was interesting to share.

Just a proof that a u87ai doesn't fit everyone!

But on monday I will receive a TLM67 and a tiny tiny 102 hehe

Last edited by evilrocker; 21st June 2012 at 08:07 PM..
Reason: added more

Well anyway, to me the U87ai and Manley ref c are totally different. To me the u87 has the same mid forward character as peluso 2247, pearman tm1 etc, on my low (dark) voice it sounds thin and boxy.

My impression of the 2247LE is that there are two things going on that bring out the mids; there's considerable resonance in the housing, and there's something in the circuitry that adds additional harmonic content. It's not just an electronic emphasis EQing up mids. It makes the mids very rich, but consequently it's not the smoothest mic in the world. It can also bring out sibilance if the sound hits the capsule on-axis. Personally, I like the 2247LE a lot, but it's not a mic that's going to work on everything, or in every room.

There is no real standard for measuring microphones. With that in mind, you can't sit there and compare two frequency plots from different manufacturers because the circumstances in which those two measurements are likely very different.

<snipped>

Is that true? I thought that the standard for the frequency plots is one meter from the source. Having said that, nobody should put too much faith in them unless everything being recorded is a meter away....